A call for digital inclusion initiatives in mental health services: An integrative review

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Digital tools such as video calls or mobile phone applications (apps) are increasingly used in the provision of mental healthcare. There is evidence that people with mental health problems are more likely to face digital exclusion: that is, they do not have access to devices and/or skills to use technology. This leaves some people unable to use digital mental health services (e.g., apps or online appointments) or to benefit more generally from access to the digital world (e.g., online shopping or connecting with others virtually). People can be digitally included through initiatives that provide devices, Internet and digital mentoring to increase knowledge and confidence when using technology. WHAT THE PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: Some initiatives in academic studies and grey literature have been shown to increase access to and knowledge of technology, but this has been outside of mental health care settings. There are currently limited digital inclusion initiatives that take into consideration the specific needs of people with mental health problems, and how they can be equipped and familiarised with digital technologies to help their recovery journey and everyday life activities. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: Further work is needed to improve the provision of digital tools in mental health care, with more practical digital inclusion initiatives to ensure equal access for all. If digital exclusion is not addressed, the gap between people with and those without digital skills or access to technology will continue to grow, enlarging mental health inequalities.

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The rise in the provision of digital healthcare during the pandemic has called attention to digital exclusion: inequality in access and/or capacity to use digital technologies. Digital exclusion is more profound in people with mental health problems, leaving an implementation gap of digital practice in mental health services.

AIM

Identify the available evidence of (a) addressing digital exclusion in mental health care and (b) the practical solutions to enhance uptake of digital mental health.

METHOD

Digital inclusion initiatives were searched from both academic and grey literature available and published between the years 2007 and 2021.

RESULTS

A limited number of academic studies and initiatives were found that supported people with mental health difficulties who had limited skills and/or access to overcome digital exclusion.

DISCUSSION

Further work is needed to combat digital exclusion and establish ways to reduce the implementation gap in mental health services.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Access to devices, Internet connectivity and digital mentoring for mental health service users is essential. More studies and programmes are needed to disseminate impact and results for digital inclusion initiatives for people with mental health problems and to inform best practice for digital inclusion within mental health services.

Using coaching skills in paediatric practice: a summary of use and benefits

This paper sets out the use and benefits of adopting a coaching style of conversation within our everyday practice. Here, we present two case examples within a paediatric setting which applies coaching skills to different contexts to help progress meaningful conversations.

The development of the concept of return-on-investment from large-scale quality improvement programmes in healthcare: an integrative systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

Return on Investment (ROI) is increasingly being used to evaluate financial benefits from healthcare Quality Improvement (QI). ROI is traditionally used to evaluate investment performance in the commercial field. Little is known about ROI in healthcare. The aim of this systematic review was to analyse and develop ROI as a concept and develop a ROI conceptual framework for large-scale healthcare QI programmes.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, Global health, PsycInfo, EconLit, NHS EED, Web of Science, Google Scholar using ROI or returns-on-investment concepts (e.g., cost-benefit, cost-effectiveness, value). We combined this terms with healthcare and QI. Included articles discussed at least three organisational QI benefits, including financial or patient benefits. We synthesised the different ways in which ROI or return-on-investment concepts were used and discussed by the QI literature; first the economically focused, then the non-economically focused QI literature. We then integrated these literatures to summarise their combined views.

RESULTS

We retrieved 10 428 articles. One hundred and two (102) articles were selected for full text screening. Of these 34 were excluded and 68 included. The included articles were QI economic, effectiveness, process, and impact evaluations as well as reports and conceptual literature. Fifteen of 68 articles were directly focused on QI programme economic outcomes. Of these, only four focused on ROI. ROI related concepts in this group included cost-effectiveness, cost-benefit, ROI, cost-saving, cost-reduction, and cost-avoidance. The remaining articles mainly mentioned efficiency, productivity, value, or benefits. Financial outcomes were not the main goal of QI programmes. We found that the ROI concept in healthcare QI aligned with the concepts of value and benefit, both monetary and non-monetary.

CONCLUSION

Our analysis of the reviewed literature indicates that ROI in QI is conceptualised as value or benefit as demonstrated through a combination of significant outcomes for one or more stakeholders in healthcare organisations. As such, organisations at different developmental stages can deduce benefits that are relevant and legitimate as per their contextual needs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Review registration: PROSPERO; CRD42021236948.

Identifying and understanding benefits associated with return-on-investment from large-scale healthcare Quality Improvement programmes: an integrative systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

We previously developed a Quality Improvement (QI) Return-on-Investment (ROI) conceptual framework for large-scale healthcare QI programmes. We defined ROI as any monetary or non-monetary value or benefit derived from QI. We called the framework the QI-ROI conceptual framework. The current study describes the different categories of benefits covered by this framework and explores the relationships between these benefits.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, Global health, PsycInfo, EconLit, NHS EED, Web of Science, Google Scholar, organisational journals, and citations, using ROI or returns-on-investment concepts (e.g., cost-benefit, cost-effectiveness, value) combined with healthcare and QI. Our analysis was informed by Complexity Theory in view of the complexity of large QI programmes. We used Framework analysis to analyse the data using a preliminary ROI conceptual framework that was based on organisational obligations towards its stakeholders. Included articles discussed at least three organisational benefits towards these obligations, with at least one financial or patient benefit. We synthesized the different QI benefits discussed.

RESULTS

We retrieved 10 428 articles. One hundred and two (102) articles were selected for full text screening. Of these 34 were excluded and 68 included. Included articles were QI economic, effectiveness, process, and impact evaluations as well as conceptual literature. Based on these literatures, we reviewed and updated our QI-ROI conceptual framework from our first study. Our QI-ROI conceptual framework consists of four categories: 1) organisational performance, 2) organisational development, 3) external outcomes, and 4) unintended outcomes (positive and negative). We found that QI benefits are interlinked, and that ROI in large-scale QI is not merely an end-outcome; there are earlier benefits that matter to organisations that contribute to overall ROI. Organisations also found positive aspects of negative unintended consequences, such as learning from failed QI.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Our analysis indicated that the QI-ROI conceptual framework is made-up of multi-faceted and interconnected benefits from large-scale QI programmes. One or more of these may be desirable depending on each organisation's goals and objectives, as well as stage of development. As such, it is possible for organisations to deduce incremental benefits or returns-on-investments throughout a programme lifecycle that are relevant and legitimate.